Supply and demand - constantly fluctuating, the world market is a dance of little movements. Price raise here, monopoly there, tugging back and forth on the tightrope of prosperity.
Supply on demand - the web of the government connects the people, dictating the value of each loaf of bread. Slow to act, it has an air of surety when it does.
In such a changing time, the quickly adjusting supply and demand system seems more reasonable than a Big Brother that can only see the big picture. However, who's to say that a central control system couldn't have calmed down the market, preventing the toilet-paper scares of early quarantine?
People rarely have anything good to say about either economy. They focus their voices on drowning each other out.
Both systems have advantages and disadvantages. Both are in use and both have been used successfully.
Just Another Paver For The Road Of Good Intentions.
You cynical, silly creatures!
You maniacs, void of patriotism!
Denying your gods, rejecting your pasts,
Revolting indecently against indecencies...
You believe that you’re rebelling against the powers that be...
You think that your government is evil, (well fair enough),
But if you’re right, and it is evil,
Then why are you giving it more power?
You are a mad flock,
Your keen nostrils knowing only that a wolf exists,
But not from which direction it prowls.
True; your shepherd has kept you penned,
Locked in against the frost.
He’s used your wool to knit socks for his babes.
But he is not the one killing you.
Capitalism may be guilty of shepherding. Of using you.
But it is socialism who growls from the shadows.
Disguising itself as a fellow victim,
It is free to pick you off at will.
And when you are convinced,
By blood-scented whispers,
That the shepherd is the wolf;
When you trample him,
Kick down his fences,
And invite a whole pack of wolves to lead you,
Will you then be free?
“Why’s there dirt under your nails?”
Before to long. The lucky few. Will posture atop their mountain of treasure. Barking orders at the sycophants in their retinue.
Flush with cash and the power it affords. Attained by capitalizing on their advantageous position over others less fortunate than themselves. I.e. buy low incomes unaffordable properties as their put on the table in trying times. And sell high when the dire economic situations of the majority of the populace has bettered financially.
The cash rich money hoarders loan those same poor people even more money. Not out of the kindness of their hearts. For a "meager" price. Like their doing you a favor. And then sell the same stuff (much acquired in foreclosure) back to the newly found prospering economically. At inflated prices. What sounds fare about this trade?
An attempt to create a society. Governed by the philosophy of? A fare distribution of the resources available amongst its populace. As though each individual is as valuable to society as the next. Which history has shown us is not the case.
So some will inherently feel taken advantage of. When they see others barely working hard receiving the same amount of resources as those busting their ass.
You only need to look at the disparities between the treatment of nuclear and extended families. How we ourselves divide time between the two. There’s only so much time to go around. So we priorities the needs of immediate family members. And there’s then lesser for those of a greater distance removed. In disparities that appear foul from a distance.Why one child has more than enough while another’s. Say brothers or cousins is left homeless of no fault their own even.
And overtime that advantageous position is leveraged into a power base reluctant to lose such comfort. So they stock pile resources. So as not to be found so hurting in the worst of economic times. That they might not fail completely. Losing everything for their offsprings future offspring as well to get a head start in mankind’s obvious pecking orders.
So in conclusion. Capitalistic and Socialistic societies often end up in the same predicament.
To little for to many. And a little with much to much.
How many aren’t guilty of building little aristocracy’s ourselves?
But what do I know I’m just a free thinker? Getting high on fiction in California.
Not evil, just imperfect.
people struggle to understand what is politics, and what is economics. they see the first one as just s bunch of guys with suits and ties giving speeches , backstabbing each other and occasionaly declaring war. politics. economics, they see as a bunch of suits sitting in offices and deciding if this is going to go up or if that is going to go down. ya know...economics.
neither of these visuakisations is accurate.
politics is loosly defined as the system in which decisions about socieity’s needs are acheived and how the power to implement these decisions is drawn . how that is accomplished may vary greatly...
economics is even more unsatisfying. economics is simply the underlying method in which resources are allocated. again, there is more than one way to skin a....well..more than one way to spread the butter over the toast.
i am starting with these two definitoons, because the question of capitalism vs. socialism is both a politican an economical question.
lets look socialism first. it hurts to see other people in need. it feels wrong to see immense disparities, especially if they evoke a personal memory of a similar need or want. socialist thought is nobal in that it tries to find a way to make sure that such gross inequality will be abolished. sadly, socialism in all its forms has shown a massive gap between the ideals and the way they turned out. here the pilitical organisation is partially to blame: be it massive superpowers, or small communes cooperatives and trade unions, we can’t seem to get people to universally strive for a utopia. coarsing people to devote their lives to a rejection of the individual need , indoctrinating them to hate, and subjecting them to repressive laws or norms, will invariably backfire. there will be abuse, corruption, waste and indifference. people that are supposed to seize the means of production will care very little for them, once the respobsibility of constantly thinking about it weighes them down. furthermore, the strong ideals of parents will not be echoed by tje children, but the reality of a repressive culture will depress them greatly. socialism struggles to find incentives, lacks efficiency, personal innitiative, innovation and waste. in my wanders upon this wastland i have lived among socialist communities (i am not including state-wide regimes, like north korea, because it would just be too extreme of a negative example) and find that they do not live up to the goals they were founded upon. it is sad to admit it, but utopias are found only in science fiction and not possible realities.
capitalism as an extention of liberal thought is just as grand and just as doomed. it assumes that people make rational decisions, and that their decisions would reconcile their self interest with morality. the result would be a world that would be as free as possible, where everyone does their best, acts fairly, collaborates when required, and strives to better their personal lot and indirectly that of the greater good. nice idea for sure.
sadly again, things are a bit trickier to work out in reality. for starters: most people are definitely not rational. i am no exception, if you ever saw me in front of an all you can eat buffet. we are greedy, we are selfish, we are destructive, jaded, insensitive, bigotted, and hateful. how is that for a strong foundation? freedom, as COVID has demonstrated is something that should be tempered with reason. if we can’t get people to wear masks as a precaution, how could we hope to get them to be decent yet competitive actors? the answer , of course is the creation of a policeman. a regulator that will suspend freedoms if they are endangering others. cooarsive measures need to be taken to curb the party just enough so the neighbors can get some sleep and no one drinks paint thinner.
sadly, “policemen” are just people too, and they are pliable as the rest.
so capitalism is disfunctional and socialism is a mess, and all is lost.
but we need to live somehow. the answer , is somewhere in between. a gray, depressing area that lacks the shine of freedome, or the promise of utopia. no wonder no one wants it. it’s too boring. it’s too weak. it’s a compromise. a policy-induced yawn.
the maxi-min is just not sexy. it is convoluted, it is far away in Eggheadland. but it boils down to this: of every possible choice of action, consider the worst outcomes. then of all those miserable outcomes , choose the course of action with the least awful possible result and not the best outcome of all wonderful oucomes.
it works on a Murphy’s law kind of level: where things could go wrong, they WILL go wrong.. and this is actually the world we live in. a combined model, allows for freedome, but it draws lines, and needs enforcment. there could be a grand vision, but it will not see trampling on people as eggs that must be cracked to make an omlette. there are social walfare, and nationally facilitated services like health, education, sponsored retraining, and infrastructure investment.
this is , again not a sexy revolution, or a sleazy, escapist binge. it is the stuff that needs to get done. now, how is this middle way achived?
politics, sad to say...